flaviobrio88
Guest
hello beppe did you know who put in the direction (r&d) of sw?
stef_design
Guest
Of course the v5 will continue to live. It makes no sense to pass to v6 if you do not pass to plm v6.
for small companies v5 is the right choice. for this ds continues development.
Of course, they also talked about deelip.com
Hi:
Last edited by a moderator:
The_Matrix
Guest
So they're things you know?
I took them as news.... I don't think the v5 is developed a great that... more Home... as it happened to the v4 when the v5 came out.
What have they introduced of novelty (real eh9 in the last 2 years on v5?
ps. If everyone knew... Then stop my post. :smile:
stef_design
Guest
Nothing. Just shit. But why? simple...the product already has a maturity and development that comes from the previous releases.
what ds seeks now is to consolidate or upgrade existing functions in cv5.
Hello matrix
The_Matrix
Guest
I think ds doesn't develop cv5 anymore from r18...
then if they consolidate and strengthen what is already there...
Whatever.
:finger:
stef_design
Guest
Maybe even before...many automotive oem are stopped at the r17.
Hi:
The_Matrix
Guest
But I don't think so.
chrysler is on v18
the biad :tongue: German is on 20 if I don't remember badly
toy is on 20
mapel
Guest
last question then I no longer disturb, at least for this topic.
differences between femap + nastran and nx 8. If I have understood nx8 siemens is a suite that contains cae and high-level cams, but does it contain what femap+nastran does?
Thank you.
differences between femap + nastran and nx 8. If I have understood nx8 siemens is a suite that contains cae and high-level cams, but does it contain what femap+nastran does?
Thank you.
The_Matrix
Guest
1x stran is the solutore in use for the whole suite cae di siemens... from the smallest module up to nx adv simulation.
It is also "our" because, with a famous sentence, the American antitrust had forced msc to quit the exclusive of the product.
femap vs nx adv simulationare 2 excellent pre/post processors.
femap is more addressed to a "neutral" use than cad.
nx adv simulation (which is part of the nx suite that has now arrived at nx8) instead is a fully integrated prepost with the cad.
inherits many femap and ideas technologies.
I personally would have no doubt: nx adv simulation (which also includes nastran, of course) forever...
The_Matrix
Guest
flaviobrio88
Guest
Yes ... I did not know that news was already published
falonef
Guest
Guys,
here we are in section v6.
so please post only problems of this software.
for the other domains there are the appropriate sections
here we are in section v6.
so please post only problems of this software.
for the other domains there are the appropriate sections
Lettore espatriato
Guest
Hi.
Luckily, I just finished a "accelerated" course of v6.
If I'm in the first place and so the first impressions could be confirmed or not as I'll deepen the knowledge of the software, I think I've noticed that:
1) cad interface: it does not change almost anything . the most annoying thing, at least for me, is the change of graphical interface, with ribbons (?) below that can not (at least at the moment they explained so) be blocked as it did in v5. so if in v5 you were used to "salt" from one menu to another, now you have to be more "metodic".
2) cad commands : some additions that however are refinements of existing things on v5 or on other cad. for example, a "multi fill" , where if you have a surface of the whipped outside b, with all its beautiful holes, you can make a single fill in tangency, in one command. Maybe a moldist could be useful.
some additions on sweep commands (such as control for the law of variation of areas).
for the environment, there is the constrain speech. are replaced by the "engineering constrain" . from the point of view of the "old constraints" and the existing assemblies, I do not know whether it is a problem or not. I know that it can be useful for cinematics because you avoid having to reconstruct the constraints on purpose as you did in v5 (or at least, I did).
I have no idea how they are. I've seen webinars about it, but I don't know where the "marketing" ends and the "serious buzz" begins.
3) enovia/plm: Here, to me that I was used to jump from teamcenter to v5 and then from v5 to tc viewer to do the analysis, there is a nice jump. In the sense that, being at least everything within the same "application" , things are slightly easier. probably, more or less, the same level of integration can be between tc and nx or between windchill and pro-e/creo (so between plm products and cad of the same house).for example, compared to vpm (which was one of v5), the big change is only in the graphics of plm. because in the part of plm we reason in graphic terms (mainly) and no longer in terms of data lists. They explained to us that, for the company, the introduction of v6 (but it could also be that the same result was reached with other plm and cad, I have no idea) will lead to the reduction of applications that use v6 from some hundreds to some tens, on which however I can not tell you anything because they are related to other business functions (buy, marketing, production, molds, etc...).
then, of course this is a little general speech. Since even on v5, teamcenter and beautiful company, customizations are wasted (sometimes only small macros, sometimes the whole program) , I wouldn't know if a company had commands not existing in another and vice versa.
4) export :3dxml, step, iges. I believe that exporting the 3dxml you can do in part what you do with the nx jt, i.e. enrich or not detail the "part" according to the recipient.
import: the world
)) no, joke, it seems to me that there are almost all formats of all software, but how everyone is "imported", well this is another speech.
5) all this obviously seen by a poor user, who has no idea where the data is saved (other than the answer "somewhere in enovia"....) .I hope, in the future, to be able to share some "command" more .))
Luckily, I just finished a "accelerated" course of v6.
If I'm in the first place and so the first impressions could be confirmed or not as I'll deepen the knowledge of the software, I think I've noticed that:
1) cad interface: it does not change almost anything . the most annoying thing, at least for me, is the change of graphical interface, with ribbons (?) below that can not (at least at the moment they explained so) be blocked as it did in v5. so if in v5 you were used to "salt" from one menu to another, now you have to be more "metodic".
2) cad commands : some additions that however are refinements of existing things on v5 or on other cad. for example, a "multi fill" , where if you have a surface of the whipped outside b, with all its beautiful holes, you can make a single fill in tangency, in one command. Maybe a moldist could be useful.
some additions on sweep commands (such as control for the law of variation of areas).
for the environment, there is the constrain speech. are replaced by the "engineering constrain" . from the point of view of the "old constraints" and the existing assemblies, I do not know whether it is a problem or not. I know that it can be useful for cinematics because you avoid having to reconstruct the constraints on purpose as you did in v5 (or at least, I did).
I have no idea how they are. I've seen webinars about it, but I don't know where the "marketing" ends and the "serious buzz" begins.
3) enovia/plm: Here, to me that I was used to jump from teamcenter to v5 and then from v5 to tc viewer to do the analysis, there is a nice jump. In the sense that, being at least everything within the same "application" , things are slightly easier. probably, more or less, the same level of integration can be between tc and nx or between windchill and pro-e/creo (so between plm products and cad of the same house).for example, compared to vpm (which was one of v5), the big change is only in the graphics of plm. because in the part of plm we reason in graphic terms (mainly) and no longer in terms of data lists. They explained to us that, for the company, the introduction of v6 (but it could also be that the same result was reached with other plm and cad, I have no idea) will lead to the reduction of applications that use v6 from some hundreds to some tens, on which however I can not tell you anything because they are related to other business functions (buy, marketing, production, molds, etc...).
then, of course this is a little general speech. Since even on v5, teamcenter and beautiful company, customizations are wasted (sometimes only small macros, sometimes the whole program) , I wouldn't know if a company had commands not existing in another and vice versa.
4) export :3dxml, step, iges. I believe that exporting the 3dxml you can do in part what you do with the nx jt, i.e. enrich or not detail the "part" according to the recipient.
import: the world
)) no, joke, it seems to me that there are almost all formats of all software, but how everyone is "imported", well this is another speech.5) all this obviously seen by a poor user, who has no idea where the data is saved (other than the answer "somewhere in enovia"....) .I hope, in the future, to be able to share some "command" more .
))Banzai
Guest
Hello, within the forum because I have passed from catia v5r14; today no longer available; a catia v6/2009.
by finding diversity of setting, I ask for help.
1) command for the generation of components of the "production".
2) command to save the entire "produt" axieme.
3) but where the fuck goes to save them drawings? I searched in all the files, but I couldn't find them.
are welcome delucidations. Thank you.
by finding diversity of setting, I ask for help.
1) command for the generation of components of the "production".
2) command to save the entire "produt" axieme.
3) but where the fuck goes to save them drawings? I searched in all the files, but I couldn't find them.
are welcome delucidations. Thank you.
Last edited by a moderator:
Sandra_ME30
Guest
sasso sp 15.12.15 13:28
hi reader, what do you mean by some additions on sweep commands (such as control for the law of variation of areas) ?
Could you tell us a little +? :
hi reader, what do you mean by some additions on sweep commands (such as control for the law of variation of areas) ?
Could you tell us a little +? :
Sandra_ME30
Guest
Expatriate reader 16.12.15 13:19
as I said I did the course, but now before we can work seriously will spend months again... or maybe weeks...
However, I was wrong: it's not on the sweep but it's on the multisection. After defining (at least) the two sections of departure and arrival, when you go to define the other parameters below (guides, thorns, etc.), you can also use a law to change the area of the section as it serves you. Not bad if you have to do a vent or something. but I'll have to mess up a bit to figure out how stable and usable.
Hello rock
as I said I did the course, but now before we can work seriously will spend months again... or maybe weeks...
However, I was wrong: it's not on the sweep but it's on the multisection. After defining (at least) the two sections of departure and arrival, when you go to define the other parameters below (guides, thorns, etc.), you can also use a law to change the area of the section as it serves you. Not bad if you have to do a vent or something. but I'll have to mess up a bit to figure out how stable and usable.
320i S
Guest
If you have a server-free installation, you will never find them as separate files, the 2009 version could not be used without a management server.
320i S
Guest
I used v6 for just over 2 years.
not having used catia v5, I cannot list its differences.
I can say that it is a cad not yet developed properly to be competitive with other cads for the 360° management of a project, I believe that the software house has devoted itself more to the implementation of enovia that I judge a great plm, I do not know how it is on the pdm side extra department r&d, since it had not yet come to be implemented at such level where I worked.
enovia is present in any catia v6 environment, it still has not quite negligible defects, such as loss of information in the bom of 2d drawings after substitution of non-related components directly, the non-perfect management of the components that you want to make ghost to the bom.
one thing I have noticed is an improvement compared to v5 is the management of constraints (engineering costrain) which are also listed with their respective components and not in a single container, difficult to manage.
of good enovia has that it is very lean in the management of extracad projects, does not oblige users to manage workspace, allows with few rules to work on a same project in many users only by blocking and unlocking the interested components.
heavy sin of enovia is that it does not accept native mathematics of v5, but enter as external files as if v5 and v6 were completely different cad.
not having used catia v5, I cannot list its differences.
I can say that it is a cad not yet developed properly to be competitive with other cads for the 360° management of a project, I believe that the software house has devoted itself more to the implementation of enovia that I judge a great plm, I do not know how it is on the pdm side extra department r&d, since it had not yet come to be implemented at such level where I worked.
enovia is present in any catia v6 environment, it still has not quite negligible defects, such as loss of information in the bom of 2d drawings after substitution of non-related components directly, the non-perfect management of the components that you want to make ghost to the bom.
one thing I have noticed is an improvement compared to v5 is the management of constraints (engineering costrain) which are also listed with their respective components and not in a single container, difficult to manage.
of good enovia has that it is very lean in the management of extracad projects, does not oblige users to manage workspace, allows with few rules to work on a same project in many users only by blocking and unlocking the interested components.
heavy sin of enovia is that it does not accept native mathematics of v5, but enter as external files as if v5 and v6 were completely different cad.
Lettore espatriato
Guest
Okay, it doesn't matter. At least one point of view without "prejudices."
you do not know how v5 is, but the constraints are better in v6. This deserves an insight.
I mean, did you use v5 or not?
apart from that, I think, large companies that have completely gone to v6 do not exist at the moment. Maybe I'm wrong, huh?
then, for what I saw, the 3d of v5 are read by v6 with all the elements built as it was a v5 (solids, surfaces, parameters, etc.). But maybe I'm wrong.
320i S
Guest
v5 is the other cad present where I worked, so the main interface I saw it and comparing myself to other colleagues, it had emerged precisely this first difference in the management of constraints.Okay, it doesn't matter. At least one point of view without "prejudices."
you do not know how v5 is, but the constraints are better in v6. This deserves an insight.
I mean, did you use v5 or not?
apart from that, I think, large companies that have completely gone to v6 do not exist at the moment. Maybe I'm wrong, huh?
then, for what I saw, the 3d of v5 are read by v6 with all the elements built as it was a v5 (solids, surfaces, parameters, etc.). But maybe I'm wrong.
I take my experience about v5 and v6 in the same company, if I needed a component of the v5 not yet imported, I then found myself dealing with an imported math like any other cad, very frustrating as what, that was a disrespect or choice of the cad manager I don't know, of course this made me miss a lot of time.